Real Food and Ray Rice
Mark Bittman’s sarcastic sense of humor in “Is ‘Eat Real Food’ Unthinkable” creates a very distinct voice that makes this blog post intriguing and effective. Early in his post, Bittman introduces us to the newest acronym on eating healthy given to us by the Department of Agriculture: SOFAS (Solid Fats and Added Sugars). He goes on to critique the many different recommendations given to Americans on how to eat healthy. The post incorporates other people such as Oprah Winfrey and her “go vegan” for a week challenge, as well as Michelle Obama and her alliance with Wal-Mart. Using these familiar faces for examples as opposed other more obscure references is effective in making the post more relatable to its targeted audience. Bittman keeps the reader engaged with his sarcastic and sometimes witty comments, some of which include: “hooray for that”, “Instead we are told to avoid SOFAS. Where’s the SOFAS aisle?” and “The salt shaker is not the culprit”. The beginning this post starts off with the introduction of an acronym about healthy eating giving to us by a large government agency. Bittman ends the post by offering the readers an acronym of his own: ERF (Eat Real Food).
“No, Hope Solo Is Not “Like” Ray Rice” by Ta-Nehisi Coates deals with the controversial issue of domestic violence. Many people believe that Hope Solo, who allegedly beat her nephew and is still playing soccer, is representing a double standard when compared to Ray Rice, who beat his fiancee and is no longer in the NFL as a result. Coates writes about this topic in a tone that is aggressive and seems slightly angry. It is very clear that Coates does not agree that Hope Solo should be lumped in the same category as Ray Rice or Adrian Peterson when it come to domestic violence. Coates incorporates an excerpt from a New York Times article which questions why Hope Solo has not been treated in a manner similar to that of Ray Rice or Adrian Peterson. The blog post keeps the reader’s attention by using examples to build up to an ultimate reason why the author is correct about this topic. Coates uses a controversial title to get people interested in the post and then works to provide an answer to why her side of the argument is the one to take. However, no satisfying conclusion is ever reached. The post begins with Coates asserting that a statement made in the New York Times is incorrect, and ends with Coates final remarks which are meant to prove her point. Unfortunately, I do not feel as though her point were proven as her argument was very weak. The structure of the post may have helped contribute to the point if a better point were being made.
Views All Time
Views Today
It seems that Coates could’ve referenced more sources to make a stronger argument. I actually analyzed a blog about the statistics between cohabitation and divorce. The blogger did a great job of including other sources that reinforced her argument. Reading your post is a reminder of how important it is to build one’s ethos to make a strong argument. While reading the content about Coates, I couldn’t help but wonder who she is and why should I care what she thinks.